Raider Sam: “It is possible to be better in the general than in the primary.”
I don’t disagree, but since we’re conservatives, we should be about trying to get conservatives elected, not simply about winning elections. Granted, we need to win, too. But let’s be clear about what “winning” means to conservatives. Winning means reigning in government. If we win the election with candidates who oppose our goals, we lose either way. In that case, I think it’s better to take a chance on the long shot. O’Donnell is an excellent case in point. Despite what Rove said, her loss wasn’t 100% guaranteed. Stranger things have happened in politics. On the other hand, we can be 100% certain that Mike Castle was going to be Mike Castle. In other words, he was going to work at cross purposes to our #1 goal (reigning in government), just like he had time and time before.
Im not saying we should or should not settle for moderates in liberal state. Just that someone can lose a primary but still be a strong general candidate.
Castle would have been a weak conservative but a strong republican in the general. Does it matter anymore? Not really.